Self-Appraisal and Its Relationship to Organizational Commitment and Job Involvement - UUM Electronic Theses and Dissertation [eTheses]

(1)

SELF-APPRAISAL AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT AND JOB

INVOLVEMENT

A thesis submitted to the Graduate School in partial fblfilment of the requirements for the degree

Master of Science (Management), UNIWRSITI UTARA MALAYSIA

by

Lim So0 Giap

(2)

8

Sekolah Siswazah (Graduate School) Universiti Utara Malaysia

PERAKUAN KERJA TESIS

(Certification Of Thesis Work)

Kami, yang bertandatangan, memperakukan bahawa (We, the undersigned, certify that)

LIM SO0 GIAP

calon untuk ijazah

(candidate for the degree of) Master of Science (Management) telah mengemukakan tesisnya yang bertajuk

(has presented his/her thesis of the following title)

Self-Appraisal And Its Relationship To Organisational Commitment And Job Involvement.

seperti yang tercatat di muka surat tajuk dan kulit tesis (as it appears on the title page and front cover of thesis)

bahawa tesis tersebut boleh diterima dari segi bentuk serta kandungan, dan meliputi bidang ilmu dengan memuaskan.

(that the thesis is acceptable in form and content, and that a satisfactory knowledge of the fiekd is coverd by the thesis).

AJK Tesis (Thesis Committee) Nama(Name) Dr ^l Dawood Ali Mithani

(Penyelia Vtama/Principal Supervisor)

Nama(Name) En- Razli Che Razak

Nama Tandatangan

(Name) (Signature)

Tarikh (Date)

(3)

PERMISSION TO USE

In presenting this thesis in partial fuhYment of the requirements for a post graduate degree Corn Universiti Utara Malaysia, I agree that the University Library may make it freely available for inspection. I tinther agree that permission for copying of this thesis in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by my supervisor (s) or, in their absence, by the Dean of the Graduate School. It is understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis or parts thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.

It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to Universiti Utara Malaysia for any scholarly use which may be made of any material from my thesis.

Requests for permission or to make other use of materials in this thesis, in whole or in part, should be addressed to :

Dean of Graduate School Universiti Utara Malaysia

06010 UUM Sintok Kedah Darul Aman

i

(4)

Abstrak

PENILAIAN SENDIRI SERTA PERHUBUNGANGNYA DENGAN KOMMITMEN ORGANISASI DAN PENGLIBATAN DALAM PEKERJAAN

Kajian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji faktor-f&or yang mempengaruhi pen&&n sendiri percapaian pekerja. Sampel yang diiji ad&h pensyarah-pensyarah yang bertugas di Institut Teknologi Mara Perlis. Pembolehubah tak bersandar yang dikaji ad&h Umur, Jantina, Pengalaman Bekerja, Kommitmen organ&i, Penglibatan Dalam Pekerjaan. Disamping itu, pembolehubah adalah penilaian sendiri percapaian pekerja. Soal selidik ini dipra-uji untk memas&an kesahan dan kebolehpercayaan. Keputusan ujian menghasilkan Alpha Cronbach = 0.91

Statist& Diskriptif Korelasi Pearson dan Multiple Regresi Analisis digunakan untuk memeriksa hubungan antara pembolehubah tak bersandar dengan pembolehubah bersandar.

Keputusan kajian ini menunjukkan hubungan sigmtikan dan positif antara umur, kommitmen organisasi, serta penglibatan dalam pekerjaan dengan penilaian sendiri percapaian pekerja. Multiple Regresi Anahsis menunjukkaxr 33.3% variabihti dalam penilaian sendiri percapaian pekerja yang dikaji itu boleh diterang oleh kelima-lima pembolehubah tak bersandar (Umur, Jantina, Pengalaman Bekerja, Kommitmen

organisasi, Penglibatan Dalam Pekerjaan).

ii

(5)

Pembolehubah yang paling baik untuk meramalkan pembolehubah dalam penilaian sendiri percapaian pekerja ialah penglibatan dalam pekejaan.

. . . lu

(6)

ABSTRACT

SELF APPRAISAL AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO ORGANISATIONAL COMMITMENT AND JOB INVOLVEMENT.

This study sought to investigate factors intluencing employee self-evaluated performance of Mara Institute of Technology in Perk Age, Gender, Job Experience, Organisational Commitment, Job Involvement are the independent variables under this study. The dependent variable is Employee Performance dimension. The instrument was pre-test for validity and reliability. The results yielded an internal consistency of Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.91

Descriptive Statistics, Pearson’s Correlation and Multiple Regression Analysis are used to investigate the relationship between Age, Gender, Job Experience, Organisational Commitment, Job Involvement with Employee Performance.

The findings showed that there were significant and positive correlations between age, organisational commitment, job involvement and employee self evaluated performance. Multiple Regression Analysis has shown that 33.3% of the observed variability in employee self-evaluated performance could be explained by the five independent variables (age, gender, job experience, organisational commitment, job involvement).

iv

(7)

The best predictor of the employee self- evaluated performance was found to be job involvement.

(8)

Completing this thesis gives me a feeling of achievement and satisfaction. I could not have completed it without the support, commitment, sacr%ce of my

supervisors, family, colleagues, and friends. To them, I would like to say thank you and special mention goes to :

1. Dr. Dawood Ali Mithni of the Economic school, UUM, for his professional guidance throughout his supervision of my thesis and En. Razli Che Razak, lecturer of School of Management, UUM, for his support and guidance in my thesis preparation.

2. The lecturers of Mara Institute of Technology who participated in this research for their kind co-operation.

3. All my course-mates and friends who contributed directly or indirectly to this research.

vi

(9)

LlSl. 01

Table 3.1 Table 3.2 Table 3.3 Table 3.4 Table 4.1 Table 4.2

Table 4.3

Table 4.4

Table 4.5

Table 4.6

Table 4.7

1’ASLES

Stratified Sampling Using Proportional Allocation Questionnaire Item Distribution

Cronbach’s Alpha Alpha If Item Deleted

Personal Demographic OfThe Sample

Mean, Standard Deviation Scores For Perhormance Dimension.

Pearson Correlation Matrix For Performance, Age, Gender And Job Experience.

Pearson Correlation Matrix For Performance And Organisational Commitment.

Pearson Correlation Matrix For Performance And Job Involvement.

Results Of The Multiple Regression Analysis Regressing the Five Independent Variables Against Employee Self-evaluated Performance.

Results Of The Multiple Regression Analysis For The Best Predictor For Employee Self-evaluated Performance.

Page 34 40 41 42 48

50

5 1

54

55

57

5 9

vii

(10)

LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 2.1 Schematic Diagram Showing :

1. analysis of employees self-appraisal

2. relationship between self-appraisal and personal demographic, organisational commitment and

job involvement . 2 2

. . . vm

(11)

TABLE OF CONTENT

PERMISSION TO USE ABSTRAK

ABSTRACT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

1 .O Introduction

1.1 Context of the Problem 1.2 Research Objective 1.3 Research Questions 1.4 Research Hypotheses 1.5 Significance of the Study

1 S. 1 Implications on Research.

1 S.2 Policies Formulation regard@ evaluation employ= perfbrmance in govemment sector 1.6 Limitations of the Study

1.6.1 Gemmlkation 1.6.2 Tie Comtraint

page

i ii iv vi vii

. . . vu1

1 1 4 4 5 5 6

6 6 6 6

(12)

CHAPTER TWO

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 2.0 Introduction

2.1 Review of the Related Literature 2.1.1 Self-Appraisal Of Performance 2.1.2 Organisational Commitment 2.1.3 Job Involvement

2.2 Research Paradigm 2.3 Definition of terms

2.3.1 Conceptual Definitions

2.3.2 Operational Definitions

CXAPTERTHREE

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 3.0 Research Design And Methodology

3.1 Typeofstudy

3.2 Source of Data

3.2.1 Unit of Analysis Population Frame

3.2.2 Sample & Sampling Technique 3.3 Data Collection Techniques

7 7 7 1 1 15 2 1 2 4 2 4 2 6

3 2 3 2 3 2 3 3

3 3 3 5

X

(13)

3.3.1 The Instrument 3.3.2 Validity of Instruments

3.3.3 Data Collection & Administration 3.4 Data Analysis Techniques

CHAPTER FOUR

PRESENTATION AND DISCISSION OF FININGS 4.0 Presentation and Discussion of Findings

4.0.1 Introductory Statements 4.0.2 Personal Demographic

4.1 Major Findings and Analysis of Findings 4.1.1

4.1.2 4.1.3

49 5 2

5 3 4.1.4

Examine The Employee SelfEvaluation On Each OfThe 7 competencies

Examine the relationship between performance and age Examine the relationship between performance and Organisational Commitment

Examine the relationship between performance and organisational commitment

Examine the relationship between performance and job involvement

5 4 4.1.5

5 6 4.1.6 Examine the variance in employee self-evaluated 5 7

performance will be explained significantly by age,

3 5 41 4 4 4 5

4 7 4 7 4 7 4 9

(14)

gender, job experience, organisational commitment and job involvement

4.3 Synthesis 61

CHAPTERFIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.0 Summary, Conclusions And Recommendations 6 2

5.1 summary 6 2

5 2 Conclusions 6 4

5.3 Recommendations 65

Bibliography ^{6 7}

Appendii A Questionnaires ⁷³

Appendix B Codebook for Questionnaires ^{8 2}

Jcii

(15)

CHAPTER ONE:

INTRODUCTION

1 .O INTRODUCTION

1.1 CONTEXT OF THE PROBLEM

It has been estimated that about 95% of performance appraisal programs involve top-down evaluations (Mount, 1984). There has been however, a growing dissatisktion with this kind of approach. Based on their interviews of 111 state government managers and professionals, Finn and Fontain (1984) concluded that neither supervisors nor subordinates viewed their current performance appraisal system as being useful. Both academicians and scholars have expressed the need to consider alternative approaches to remedy the shortcomings of the current system. Specikally, subordinate self-appraisal has been recommended for implementation in industry as well as in public-sector organ&ions as part of a multiple appraisal system.

With today’s emphasis on “TQM,” it seems clear that the performance appraisal should be a significant concern for enlightened public relations

(16)

The contents of the thesis is for

internal user

only

(17)

Bibliography

Angle, Harold L. and Perry L. (1983). “OrganisationaJ commitment : Individual and Organisational influences.” Work and Occunations, Vol. 17, pp. 123- 369.

Bemardine, H., and Beatty, R. (1984). Performance An&Sal. Boston: Kent Publishing.

Bhasin, Roberta. (1992). ‘Career Development: Self-Appraisal.” Pulp & Paner [PUP], Vol. 66, pp. 33.

Blau, Gary J. (1985). “‘A multiple study investigation of the dimensional&y of job involvement.” Journal of Vocational Behaviour, Vol. 27, pp. 19 - 36.

Cascio, W. F., & Valenzi, E. R. (1977). “Behaviorally anchored rating scores : Ef&cts of education and raters and ratees.” Journal of Applied Psycholoav, Vol. 62, pp. 278 - 282.

Dubii Robert. (1956). “Industrial workers’ worlds : A study of the central life interests of industrial workers.” Social Problems, Vol. 3, pp, 13 1 - 42.

Finn, R., and Fontaine, P. (1984). “Performance appraisal: Some dynamics and dilemmas.” Public Personnel Manauement, Vol. 13, pp. 335-342.

Gechman, Arthur S. and Wiener, Yoash. (1975). “Job involvement and satisfaction as related to mental health and personel time devoted to work.” Journal of

&X-died Psychology, Vol. 60, pp. 52 l-523.

Goodman, Paul S., Rose. Jerry H. and Furcon, John E. (1970). “Comparison of motivational antecendents of the work perhormance of scientists and engineers.” Journal Of ADDtied Psvcholorzv, Vol. 54, pp. 491 - 495.

67

(18)

Hamner, W. C., Kim, J. S., Baird, i., & Bigoness, N. J. (1974). ‘Race and sex as determinants of ratings by potential employers in a simulated work sampling task.” Journal of Apt&d Psycholoav, Vol. 59, pp. 261 - 711.

Homans, George C. (1958). ‘Social behavior as exchange.” m, Vol. 63, pp. 597 - 606.

JIgen, D.R, Fischer, C. D., and Taylor, M.S. (1974). ‘Consequences of individual feedback on behaviour.” Journal ofApDlied, Vol. 64, pp. 443 - 463.

Jones, S.C (1973). ‘Self and interpersonnel evaluation : Esteem theories vs.

consistency theories.” Psvcholoaical Bulletin, Vol. 79, pp. 185 - 199.

Jones, S.C and Schneider, D. J. (1968). “Certainty of self - Appraisal and reactions to evaluation f?om others.” w, Vol. 3 1, pp. 395 - 403.

Jurgensen, D. E. (1950). “Intercorrelations in merit rating traits.” Journal of Applied Psvcholorzy, Vol. 34, pp. 240 -243.

Kanungo, Rabindra N. (1982). Work Ahentation : An Interarative Annroach, New York. Praeger Publishers.

Kidron, Aryeh. (1978). “ Work values and organizational commitment.” Academy

~fManagement Journal, Vol. 21, pp. 239 - 147.

Klores, M. S. (1966). “Rater bias in forced-distriiution ratings.” Personnel Psychologv, Vol. 19, pp. 41 l- 421.

68

(19)

Larson, Erik W. and Fukami, Cynthia V. (1984). “Relationships between worker behavior and commitment to the omtional and union.” In Johd A.

Pearce II and Richard B. Robinson, Jr ( Eds.), Proceedings of the 44th annual Meetings of the Academy of Management, Boston, pp. 222 - 226.

Lawrie, John W. (1989). ‘“Your performance: Appraise it yourself?” Personnel JPER], Vol. 66, pp.21-23.

Lee, D., & Alvares, K. (1977). “Effixt of sex on descriptions and evaluations of supervisory behavior in a simulated industrial setting.” Journal of AoDlied P&$&Jgy, Vol. 62, pp. 405 -410.

Lodahl, Thomas M. and Kejner, Mathilde. (1965). “The definition and measurement of job involvement.” Journal of aDDlied Psvcholoq, Vol. 49, pp. 24 - 33.

London, M., & Poplawski, J. R. (1976). “Eff’ects of information on stereotype development in performance appraisal and interview context.” Journal of

&plied Psycholoav, Vol. 61, pp. 199 - 205.

Mandell, M. M. (1964). “Supervisory characteristic and ratings: A summary of recent research.” Personnel Psvchology, Vol. 32, pp. 435 - 440.

Meyer, H.H. (1980). “Self-appraisal of job performance.” Personnel Psvcholom, Vol. 33, pp. 291 - 2%.

Mount, M. (1984). ‘Psychometric properties of subordinate ratings of managerial psychology.” persomrel Vol. 37, pp. 687-702.

69

(20)

Morris, James H and Sherman J. Daniel. (198 1.) “Genemhzab$ty of an organizational commitment model.” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 24, pp. 512- 526.

Morrow, Paula C. (1983). “‘Concept redundancy in organizational research : The case of work commitment.” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 8, pp.

486 -500.

Mowday, Richard T., Porter, Lyman W. and Dubii Robeit. (1974). “unit performance, situational factors, and employee attitudes in spatially separated work units.” Ommizational Behaviour and Human Pezformance, Vol. 12, pp. 231-248.

Mowday, Richard T., Porter, Lyman W. (1979). ‘The measurement of organizational commitment.” Journal of Vocational Behaviour, Vol. 14, pp.

224 - 247.

Saal, Frank E. (1978). “Job involvement : A multivariate approach.” Journal of Applied Psycholoav, Vol. 63, pp. 53 -61.

Salancik, Gerald R. (1977). “Commitment and control of organizational behaviour and belief” In Barry M. Staw and Gerald R. Salancik ( Eds.) New Directions in Organizational Behaviour. Chicago, III. : St. Clair Press, pp.

l-54.

Saleh, S. 0 and Hosek, James(1976). “Job involvement : Concepts and measurement.” Academv of Management Journal, Vol. 19, pp. 213 - 224.

Schlenker, B. R., (1980). Imnression Management, Cal.: Brooks / Cole.

70

(21)

Shrauger, J. S., (1975). ‘Response to evaluation as a function of self-perception.”

Psycholoav Bulletin, Vol. 82, pp. 581 - 5%.

Shrauger, J. S. and Lund, A. K., (1975). ‘Self- evaluation and reactions to evaluation from others.” Journal OfPersonalitv, Vol. 43, pp. 94 -108.

Shrauger, J. S. and Schoeneman, T. J., (1979). “Symbolic interactions view of self - concept : Through The Looking Glass Darkly.” Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 86, pp. 549 - 573.

Schwartz. Howard S. (1982). “Job involvement as obsession-compulsion.”

Academy of Management Review, Vol. 7, pp. 429432.

Siegel, Alan L. and Ruh, Robert A. (1973). “Job involvement, participation in decision making, personal background and job behavior.” Organizational Behaviour m Vol. 9, pp. 318-327.

Slocum, John W., Jr and Cron, William L. (1985). “Job Attitudes and Performance during three career stages.” Journal of Vocational Behaviour, Vol. 26, pp.

126 - 145.

Steers, Richard M. (1977). c‘Antecedems and outcomes of organizational czmnmitment.” Administrative Science Guartelv, Vol. 22, pp. 46-56.

Taylor, G. Stephen; Lehman, Carol M; Forde, Connie M. (1989). “How Employee SelfAppraisals Can Help.” Su~ervisorv Management TSPMl. Vol. 34, pp.

32-41.

Van Maanen, John (1975). “Police socialization : A longitudinal examination of job attitudes in an urban police department.” Administrative Science Guarterlv, Vol. 20, pp. 207-228.

7 1

(22)

Vroom, V i c t o r H . (1962). “Ego-involvement, job satisfaction and job performance.” Personnel Psvcholom, Vol. 15, pp. 159- 177.

Waldrop, Heidi (1986). ‘Rating with Mirrors.” Computer Decisions [COMI, Vol. 18, pp. 6264.

Wexley, K. N. and Klimoski, R. (1984). “Performance Appraisal : An update.” In K. M. Rowland and G. R. Ferris ( Eds ). Research In Personnel And Human Resources Management, Vol. 2, pp. 35 - 83 , Greenwich, Conn. : JAI Press, Inc.

Wiener, Toash. (1982). ‘Commitment in organizational : A normative view.”

Academv of Manaaement Review, Vol. 7, pp. 418-428.

Wiener, Yoash and Gechman, Arthur S. (1977). c‘Commitment : A behaviour approach to job involvement.” Journal of Vocational Behaviour, Vol. 10 pp. 47-52.

Wiener, Yoash and Vardi, Yoav. (1980). ‘Relationships between job, organization, and career commitments and work outcomes - an integrative approach.”

Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, Vol. 26, pp. 81-96.

Yuki, Gary. (1981). Leadership in Oraanizations. Englewood Clif&, Nj : Prentice Hall, Inc.

72